Jump to content
 

Hornby A2/2 and A2/3 (2020 Range)


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, landscapes said:

Hi David

 

If you are correct then I can leave the early tender totem in place as I am modelling 1958.

 

I may just leave the model as it is for now as I would also have to change the double chimney as well.

 

I also have a Graeme King resin double chimney as well I can fit if required.

 

Regards

 

David

I'll dig through some books. But I'm pretty sure I'm right. Only looked a few days ago. I think at some point it acquired a distinct kink on the steam pipe too.

Edited by davidw
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, davidw said:

I'll dig through some books. But I'm pretty sure I'm right. Only looked a few days ago. I think at some point it acquired a distinct kink on the steam pipe too.

Yes Hornby missed that detail on the steam pipe but I have seen a photo with the pipe dead straight so the model could be accurate.

 

Another reason to keep 60501 as it is, to many alterations required to bring it up to the late 1950’s look.

 

Also I spoke to Hatton’s yesterday and they confirmed they are still awaiting delivery of 60501.

 

Regards

 

David

Edited by landscapes
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies, the photo was dated 1st August 58

It's in Power of the A2s. Here's a photo of he photo. I hope a poor photo of a good photo doesn't break copyright. IMG_20210206_084005057.jpg.04901a3f64865f614f6c011010768d8a.jpg

It was of course May 60 when it was withdrawn. Not March, where the same book records it on the scrap line.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, davidw said:

I've found a photo dated 1st August 1958 COTN is still carrying early crest. By May 1960 it had late crest. 

 

That's interesting, so I pulled out my Yeadons to hopefully add to your findings. It says COTN was condemned on 8/2/60 and then cut up at Doncaster works. Of course that pre dates May 60, so I wonder which dates are correct. TOF was condemned on 10/11/59 and there is a photo confirming that.

Edited by gordon s
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, gordon s said:

 

That's interesting, so I pulled out my Yeadons to hopefully add to your findings. It says COTN was condemned on 8/2/60 and then cut up at Doncaster works. Of course that pre dates May 60, so I wonder which dates are correct. TOF was condemned on 10/11/59 and there is a photo confirming that.

It was late when I wrote the post. I wrote May 60, I meant March. The photo in The Power Of The A2s show it on the scrap line in March. This would be consistent with withdrawal a month earlier in the Feb which is what Yeardons states.

Edited by davidw
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, davidw said:

Apologies, the photo was dated 1st August 58

It's in Power of the A2s. Here's a photo of he photo. I hope a poor photo of a good photo doesn't break copyright. IMG_20210206_084005057.jpg.04901a3f64865f614f6c011010768d8a.jpg

It was of course May 60 when it was withdrawn. Not March, where the same book records it on the scrap line.

Hi David 

 

Many thanks for the photo, just realised I have this book.

 

Regards

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 69843 said:

Interesting to note the tyre looks to be a trapezoid and not totally flat-I wonder if this is an attempt to still make the wheelset spin when on straight track and then when it swings out it stops.

These flangeless wheels have been know to fall outside the rail on tight curves. I think the chamfered outer parts of the treads are there to ease the wheels up onto the rails again.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I took the plunge and Thane of Fife arrived this morning. My initial reaction was moderate pleasure. There is a tight spot in mine, so that is where it stops. Starting again, of course, it jumps a bit as the tight spot is overcome but once it gets going, it runs well enough. Top lampiron in the box (luckily) and scoop the wrong way round, of course.

 

Some comparisons: Lord Rodney on the right. I was very disappointed by Rodney. Thane is a little better but not much. At least the boiler bands aren’t shiny as they are on Rodney.

 

1592336357_ThaneRodney.jpg.c67316f370cf1cc66a78e2bc2334c5d8.jpg

 

Now with Tintagel Castle. I know Tintagel is in GWR green but the two should be similar. I bought Tintagel a month short of ten years ago. What has gone wrong since?

 

514585644_ThaneTintagel.jpg.b68156fb1aec25a3b65d3633d1b537b4.jpg

 

Argh! What on earth is this? Look at the expansion link. That might be catching and causing the tight spot. Sadly, It’ll have to go back. The cylinders also look to be more steeply inclined than the 1 in 30 they should be. The piston rod seems to be at a different angle and closer to what the cylinders should be.

 

Expansion Link.jpg

  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, atom3624 said:

A dab of paint and a couple of Fox's finest later ...

 

Looks much more like it - OK the plates are a bit 'clean' for a dulled smokebox, but I like it!!

 

Al.

60501 - CotN R3830 - 20210206-1.jpg

Hi Al

 

Looks great, may I ask did you remove the original nameplates or glue the new ones over the existing? 

 

Regards

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange.

My CotN is perfectly smooth.

I hope you can resolve it's running issues.

 

I recently had a horrible situation with my Duchess of Hamilton R3677 and found one pair very slightly 'out-of-quarter' or different to the others.

If it's not binding, may be worthwhile taking a few photos of each side at different stages of rotation - the 'error' was very, very slight.

 

Al.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, landscapes said:

Hi Al

 

Looks great, may I ask did you remove the original nameplates or glue the new ones over the existing? 

 

Regards

 

David

Hi David,

 

Thanks.

I masked over the old ones when 'the dab of paint' went on.

I noticed them 'twanging' when removing the 3M masking tape, but decided to leave them in place, and simply black-tacked the plates over the old ones.

 

The Fox plates are actually slightly larger than the originals.

 

Al.

Edited by atom3624
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, atom3624 said:

Hi David,

 

Thanks.

I masked over the old ones when 'the dab of paint' went on.

I noticed them 'twanging' when removing the RM masking tape, but decided to leave them in place, and simply black-tacked the plates over the old ones.

 

The Fox plates are actually slightly larger than the originals.

 

Al.

Hi Al

 

Many thanks I think you did the right thing and they look very good, when I finally get 60501 I will be doing the same.

 

The etched brass nameplates as good as they are have no real depth to them, its OK fitting them to smoke deflectors but I was wondering how to glue a flat brass nameplate to the side of a circular smokebox and what you have done seems the sensible option.

 

Regards

 

Daivd

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 04/02/2021 at 21:26, atom3624 said:

Just gave my CotN 60501 a closer inspection:

 

POSITIVES:

  1. Running plate - straight as a die - checked with a steel rule - no ski jumps or jelly moulds.
  2. Lamp brackets - all present.
  3. Cab - lines up perfectly to tender - running plate lines up perfectly to the tender chassis.  No droop on mine!
  4. Performance - absolutely superb - very quiet, smooth, can crawl ridiculously slowly and be cranked up to perhaps a scale 110mph - 9 coaches with relative ease.
  5. Locomotive weight - quite acceptable as well.

NEGATIVES:

  1. That 'green' - not the biggest fan.
  2. Tender - much too light - corrected with a reasonable amount of lead - loco+tender = 500g - total coincidence!
  3. Boiler bands - strange - hardly see the orange, and black far too dominant.

I removed the easily removed body - great news - Hornby's best motor and no stupid flywheel - not a fan - creates inertia.

Agreed - running plate woefully unstable - now agreed the Bachmann format should be considered for top-of-the-line locomotives.

Smokebox strangely blanked off completely - no room to add a little more weight, which by locomotive weight alone would be nice, but by the performance, tbh, really doesn't appear necessary.

 

OVERALL:

SUPERB LOCOMOTIVE MODEL - great effort.

All detailing fitted - didn't locate the plate to glue under the front buffer beam to catch the 3-link, so used a 'spare' Royal Scot one ... no-one would know!

Added a few Springside lamps.

Fitted Springside crew.

Ordered Fox's etched plates - just will add that little 'something'.

 

Wondering if it's too soon to dull the smokebox - normally mask of the lot except the smokebox and matt black it for effect.

Definitely a 'keeper' and top drawer.

 

Al.

 

What's the Factory Code on the Box?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I see Sams Trains had a review up . Looks like great running qualities  but indifferent finish . Too plasticky, not assembled very well , shade of green not similar to Bachmann A2 . Seems fair observations when people are considering coating  the loco with varnish 

Edited by Legend
  • Like 3
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I received my Thane of Fife after swearing I wasn't going to order one of these!

 

I noticed a lot of damage to the clam shell plastic packaging probably from transport. The middle lamp iron had come lose in the box but was a quick fix with tweezers and a dab of glue.

 

Haven't noticed any cab droop or deviated running plate which I was worried about.

 

In certain lights and distances the paint finish looks ok, even in Sam's own video when not viewed under a harsh white light and from further away the green looked ok.

 

I compared Thane of Fife to the Hornby B17 Barnsley as it is the only other loco I have in BR green and there is a noticeable difference in shade, glossiness and quality between the two with the naked eye. The B17 has a much more matt finish and is slightly darker plus the boiler banding is exquisite! 

 

Haven't had Thane of Fife running yet (may not until I have a day off next week) so can't report on that.

 

Overall I am impressed. They are certainly ugly from some quarters but look great from others. I never would have believed I would have a RTR model of one in my collection, with a W1, rebuilt W1 and a P2 joining it too! Hornby are to be commended for adding missing links in the LNER Pacifics to their roster. One may not have to dream too much for the A1/1 eventually or the Raven A2s

20210206_195356.jpg

20210206_195955.jpg

20210206_195533.jpg

20210206_195453.jpg

Edited by mckinneyc
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Legend said:

I see Sams Trains had a review up . Looks like great running qualities  but indifferent finish . Too plasticky, not assembled very well , shade of green not similar to Bachmann A2 . Seems fair observations when people are considering costing the loco with varnish 

I saw that. Certainly his loco had very disappointing build quality. I'd be very upset if mine had appeared like that, which it doesn't. But other comments he made were unjustified. No firebox flicker, no diecast running plate. Those were never promised... He implied these were expected on a model of this price.... 

Well it's not cheap but wait til the V2 appears.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
30 minutes ago, Legend said:

I see Sams Trains had a review up . Looks like great running qualities  but indifferent finish . Too plasticky, not assembled very well , shade of green not similar to Bachmann A2 . Seems fair observations when people are considering costing the loco with varnish 

 

His one does look like the typical Friday afternoon special from a certain factory that Hornby have used.

 

Green is always a subjective colour as it can look different from one person to another. 

There's nothing wrong with adding a clear coat, you just need to know what you're doing - I certainly wouldn't use a gloss clear coat as it would look toy like.

 

25 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

Mine has:  GFT01-10008025

 

Thanks, having seen Sam's Trains example, I was suspecting Refined.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, No Decorum said:

Argh! What on earth is this? Look at the expansion link. That might be catching and causing the tight spot. Sadly, It’ll have to go back. The cylinders also look to be more steeply inclined than the 1 in 30 they should be. The piston rod seems to be at a different angle and closer to what the cylinders should be.

 

That's pretty poor really isn't it.  The top of the expansion link is accommodated in a recess in the underside of the running plate, so I imagine if assembled the wrong way round like that it won't fit within the recess at certain points of its travel and would stick.

 

I had a look at mine and on it the piston rod & slide bars seem to be in line with the cylinders as they should be, so perhaps yours is assembled wrongly in other ways, too?

 

I've realised on looking further at mine that it doesn't have a reversing rod!  No sign of it in my house; if the shop took it out to give it a run before sending it to me it could have fallen off there, or it may never have had one.  Either way, it isn't there now, I suppose I can make one .... 

 

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...